Toyota RAV4 vs CR-V: driver death rate - why so different?

max_b

I found this Insurance Institute for Highway Safety report:

http://www.iihs.org/externaldata/srdata/docs/sr4605.pdf

It seems to say that for the model years they looked at (2008 and equivalent), CR-V's seem to be substantially safer than RAV-4's, judging by the driver death rate, in single-vehicle accidents. (And the driver death rate is a much more relevant info than some contrived crash tests)

Can anyone explain why? Does RAV-4 have issues with ESC?

Looking across the board, at Accords, CR-V and Pilot, Honda seems to be leading the pack in the overall driver death rate, in their corresponding categories (Civics are pretty unsafe, but they are light).

What is Honda doing better than the competitors in protecting the driver?

stever

The report sure points at the stability control and rollover issues. On paper, the safety specs look similar (you can find that info by going to the Used Car link above, pick Appraise, drill down to the 2008 models and pick Safety under the More tab).

The other wrinkle in the two models you are looking at is that the CR-V only came in a 166hp 4 cylinder. The RAV-4s until recently were available either as a 4 cylinder or as a peppy 269hp V6.

max_b

Thanks pointing that out.

Looking closely, I actually began to suspect that the report might be bogus:

For example, for Honda Pilot 4WD, the multi-vehicle death rate is 20, and for the 2WD version, it's 5.

Is there any possible reason for this?

stever

No idea. The other thing you could do is try to find "twinned" vehicles and see how they compare. Maybe go back to the Vibe and Matrix. Or the Enclave and Traverse.